Lord Best report

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Lord Best report

    For anyone interested -

    Chapter 6 focus on Leasehold..


    Thanks for posting the link. I'll have to read the report.


      Do we need a new regulator?

      Time will tell but my initial view is that agents charges will increase if and when the proposals are implemented. The cost of training and membership of the regulator will be passed on to leaseholders.

      If the regulator suggests a list of fees which may be charged and a set of tariffs, that will become the minimum and then agents are likely to provide extreme examples of those fees being inadequate which is likely to increase the charges.

      More transparency is fine but the report seems to identify the problem of identifying when the agent fails to disclose information. Is it realistic to expect solicitors and accountants to report agents who are instructing them?

      I could not find anything about enfranchisement or forfeiture and only 3 short paragraphs about commonhold.


        Eagle - Lord Best's report was targeted towards regulation (with teeth) and transparency.
        The Select Committee Report and Law Commission focused on the areas you mention above.
        The CMA have just closed their own consultation and have received an overwhelming amount of evidence to process.
        On another note- I see Landlords are potentially in for another hammering (controlled rents).


          We shall have to wait and see, my comment was that the FTT could have been given teeth,

          Transparency in theory exists today through the RICS code of practice, many agents are not complying with it, Detecting the connection between persons associated with agents is not easy. The report appears to recognise the difficulty.

          I think that the landlords and agents ability to introduce money making schemes has been underestimated.


            The FTT has always been skewered. It is symptomatic of the deeply embedded flawed area that is leasehold.
            That's why the true champions of leaseholders - LKP - have always been shunned. They asked to be part of the FTT for example, and were refused. There is too much at stake for too many people.
            Shared ownership/Help to Buy schemes have taken it to a whole new level of abuse.


              Michelle - please do not exaggerate, LKP is not the "true champions of leaseholders", your knowledge of the subject seems to be seriously flawed, please carry out some research and study the history.


                Really? That is not my experience. They have fought hard and campaigned hard for many years for leaseholders. I have witnessed many examples if this in the past year.
                What am I missing?


                  Originally posted by michelle230 View Post
                  Really? That is not my experience. They have fought hard and campaigned hard for many years for leaseholders. I have witnessed many examples if this in the past year.
                  What am I missing?
                  Your knowledge appears to be superficial, you have frequently raised comments as though they were new issues when the problems have existed for decades. You do not appear to have a sense of priorities.

                  Your comment that freeholders will be eager to sell their portfolios is not supported by any evidence.

                  Which Magazine estimated that leaseholders were being overcharged by £700 million per annum in 2011. The Select Committee noted that the leasehold sector is now larger and that figure is likely to be higher.

                  Freeholders and their agents are not going to give up their share of the cake overnight or anytime soon, the chances are that they will be studying new money making schemes.


                    Yes. There is a pool of people whose businesses are based on finding loopholes in the law to extract money from the public for no real service. They tent to be very good at keeping just short of criminal prosecution. As in a military situation, an attacker only has to find one weakness, whereas defenders have to envisage all possible attacks.

                    You get hints at this, but generally for one man businesses, even on the letting side of these forums, where you will find people proposing all sorts of schemes to extract money from properties (not least AirBnB based), or attempting to find holes in things like the tenant fees legislation.

                    A lot of businesses these days aren't predicated on having the skills to provide a service with money being secondary, but treat money as primary and just look for ways to obtain it, whilst keeping just within the law (or not so far out that a prosecution is likely).


                      I have no doubt that there are certain individuals who are employed full time to devise ways of pushing charges to the limit whilst ensuring that it is impossible to prove criminal activity

                      Vague comments about transparency, which cannot be enforced easily if at all and which can be circumvented, are not going to stop overcharging. It seems to be a token effort and there seems to be a general reluctance to tackle the real problem. These reports should follow the money, identify the persons who are benefitting and their connections.


                        That's actually the job of most of the head office people in any consumer facing organisation. The difference here is that there is no valid service being provided.

                        For example, supermarkets, and even franchised petrol stations with convenience shops, produce detailed plans of how products are to be arranged on the shelves. Thatt's done to psychologically tempt you into buying more than you intended, and to buy the high profit branded products.


                          At least with a supermarket or convenience shop, you have a choice, you can choose to go elsewhere.


                            I accept that transparency is better than nothing but can anyone explain how it assists a leaseholder if an agent declares that he receives say 5% commission on an insurance policy? A leaseholder is unlikely to be able to prove that the disclosure is incorrect. To have any meaning at all, someone should carry out spot checks to verify that the information is correct. I do not see that contained within the proposals.

                            Does anyone seriously think that an agent is going to admit to receiving 40% to 60% commission?


                              Carrying out spot checks would require an increase in tax payer spend. No Conservative government is going to sanction that.

                              (As I said elsewhere, I think the country has reached a point where respect for the law is in terminal decline, as a result of not funding pro-active enforcement, to keep taxes low.)


                              Latest Activity


                              • Pansies before people
                                by D P Dance
                                The managing agents of one of my rental properties, who have been vilified on Trust Pilot, when asked if they are considering relief for landlords whose tenants have defaulted on their rent have refused point blank to consider offer help and have told me I quote

                                .. you need to accept the...
                                24-03-2020, 13:24 PM
                              • Reply to Pansies before people
                                by D P Dance
                                In normal times I would agree with you ram, but these are not normal times.
                                28-03-2020, 16:19 PM
                              • Solicitor & valuer advice
                                by C@johnD
                                Hi all,

                                I'm new to the site, so I hope I'm posting to the appropriate forum.

                                I am looking to extend my lease. I live in London SW14 (Mortlake/Barnes). I have 89 years left on the leasehold, and I've had the lease for 15 years. I'm recently married and ultimately want to put...
                                27-03-2020, 19:07 PM
                              • Reply to Solicitor & valuer advice
                                by Section20z
                                He just wants a lease extension so not sure of the relevance of your question but being there is 89 years left and he has had it 15 years, it would be very unlikely he is the first lessee as that would be a 104 year term !...
                                28-03-2020, 13:38 PM
                              • Reply to Pansies before people
                                by ram
                                As suggested / intimated in all above, as well as the following.
                                Your contract is with the freeholder, via the managing agent.
                                Your wages, your job, is no concern of the freeholder - except for people buying flats, to ensure they can afford the forthcoming service charges, and if they think
                                28-03-2020, 12:47 PM
                              • Reply to Solicitor & valuer advice
                                by Tipper
                                Are you the first leaseholder? Or did you buy the lease from a previous owner?
                                28-03-2020, 10:58 AM
                              • Reply to Solicitor & valuer advice
                                by TruthLedger
                                Best value is, probably, going to be if you do a look up on google since you'll get access to multiple sources with reviews. Then, there is whether you want to do it online versus physically going into a building. Personally, I prefer the online route because it's cheaper, more convenient and less hassle...
                                28-03-2020, 10:45 AM
                              • Reply to Solicitor & valuer advice
                                by C@johnD
                                Ok thanks! Apologies if I've been inappropriate, I just don't know where to turn for referrals as I don't know anyone who has ever been in my position.

                                As for local firms versus non-local, is the only real advantage proximity to show ID, etc? Cost of travel versus high fees may make it...
                                28-03-2020, 08:42 AM
                              • Coronavirus - Tenant demanding Deep clean of common areas & hand sanitiser installed
                                by LeeMac
                                Hi I wonder if anyone can provide any advice?

                                My tenant is demanding that l and/or the Freeholders deepclean the common areas of the building and install a hand sanitiser by the communal front door.

                                I have a share of the freehold and one of the flats in the converted building...
                                20-03-2020, 23:32 PM
                              • Reply to Coronavirus - Tenant demanding Deep clean of common areas & hand sanitiser installed
                                by nukecad
                                I never said that your link did contain that wording, because clearly it doesn't.

                                But neither does it contain the wording that it is 'no longer a highly infectious disease', which is what you were trying to have people believe by making just that assertion and then posting the link supposedly...
                                27-03-2020, 23:11 PM